For the record, I just started watching “Supergirl” since I have never watched and need to see how bad it supposedly is. The opening titles are cool. They look CGI, but they are all practical effects; cut steel names with smoke and lights: www.youtube.com...

I liked that movie a bit when I was a kid. I was easily entertained though. Haven't watched it since. Supposedly CBS will be doing a new Supergirl TV series, but it's CBS, so it will have police procedural stuff in it. Ridiculous.

Ike, no desire to follow a series. More like I just need to finally see it. And recovering from being sick this past week is just the excuse I need. Helen Slater is pretty good. But honestly the effects so far seem like a Dr. Who episode. If I paid money to see this in the theater I would have been disappointed.

Ike, I liked 1980s Doctor Who. Because I got to watch it on TV for free. And the effects work well that way. But I was 16 in 1984 and when “Supergirl” came out you had to pay money to see that. That’s the difference.

Good point. I think I rented Supergirl on VHS tape for like $2 or something. Anyway, I just watched Under the Skin, the creepy, ice-cold sci-fi art film starring Scarlett J. That freaked me the fuck out. Unsettling and hard to interpret. Great soundtrack.

Funny you mention that. “Under the Skin” sounds interesting, but I think that Scarlett Johansson is miscast in all of these sci-fi/action roles. Ditto with Bradley Cooper. Neither of them seem like stars to me. But hey! Also I realized a generational rift I have: I had many film experiences before VHS or cable. So if you saw a bad film, you paid money and don’t want to think about it. Whereas now, moviegoing is a whole other experience… Like I can have Chinese bootleg ladies offer me DVDs on the street.

UTS isn't a sci-fi/action movie, more like sci-fi European art film; it's creepy, slow, and hypnotic, and SJ does a great job. It offers no explanations. Like if Krzysztof Kieślowski filmed a near-silent sci-fi movie, w/a touch of Cronenberg, maybe.

Given its budget of something like a measly $4000 per episode, Dr. Who occasionally came up w/unexpectedly impressive effects (for the time) or interesting images... all mixed together with terrible and laughable stuff, of course. One goofy episode had a evil alien cactus impersonating the Doctor, but the makeup was neat: www.youtube.com...

Wow Rich this is wonderfully terrible. This needs to be a radio station format.

1:42am
JakeGould:

And folks, I am not disrespecting Doctor Who. Not at all. And I respect the Daleks as well as old school effects. But as far as Bushwick artists go, I am not even disrespecting. I'm just saying it can be done. And that's not a bad thing. But if I paid money to see "Supergirl"
In a theater I would not have been happy. Same effects film did James Bond film effects and even the "Superman" films. But in this one the effects seem just cheap enough to be "Meh" on the big screen.